Poll: Would you buy a high MP Canon EOS 5DIV?

[Maiaibing]

Either way in keeping with Canon's penchant for higher priced gear than the competition, there's little doubt the Canon challenge to the a7r/D800/D810, will be quite a bit more expensive.

I am not sure why you conclude that Canon is usually more expensive. My perception is different. Canon used to be both better and cheaper and only recently lost that lead.

Both 5DI and 5DII where far lower priced than anything remotely compatible from Nikon. The same has been true for the Rebel series for a long time. 70D - Canon's best selling DSLR for a while - also seems very competitive. It was only after the event of the D800 shortly after the launch of 5DIII that Nikon suddenly seemingly leapfrogged Canon on both price and innovation.

 

[eml58]

Either way in keeping with Canon's penchant for higher priced gear than the competition, there's little doubt the Canon challenge to the a7r/D800/D810, will be quite a bit more expensive.

I am not sure why you conclude that Canon is usually more expensive. My perception is different. Canon used to be both better and cheaper and only recently lost that lead.

Ok, let's look at what I use and it may give some idea of why I have the opinion that Canon gear is generally more expensive than nearest equivalent Nikon gear.

I currently own 1Dx, 5DMK III (The 1Dx was at release, much more expensive than the D4, the 5DMK III at release was much more expensive than the D800)

Currently list priced
1Dx $6799/D4 $5999/D4s $6499
5DMK III $3399/D800 $2999/D810 $3299

I currently own & use (among others) these Canon Lenses 200f/2, 300f/2.8 II, 200-400f/4, 600f/4 & I sold my 400f/2.8 II last year.

Current list prices
Canon 200f/2 $5999
Nikon 200f/2 $5999

Canon 300f/2.8II $6599
Nikon 300f/2.8 $5899

Canon 400f/2.8II $10499
Nikon 400f/2.8 $ 9549

Canon 200-400f/4 $11799 (Yes, it has a built in 1.4x)
Nikon 200-400f/4 II $6999 (1.4x costs $400 ??)

Canon 600f/4II$11999
Nikon 600f/4 $10299

This "Trend" of Canon's being more expensive has been in place for a while now, I won't argue that the generally newer developed Canon Whites have an IQ advantage over the equivalent Nikon Lenses, but that argument doesn't wash with friends that use nikon, I prefer the Canon set up, and I've tried the Nikon set up (D800/D3x/D4).

What Canon "used to be" is to me less important than where Canon are today, they are more expensive, in the gear that I use, how they fit in the Market segments that I don't use is of zero importance to me.

In the area of FF Camera Bodies, and generally Long Lenses, Canon are more expensive, certainly more than Nikon & Sony, again, in many cases for good reason in particular over Sony, Sony have developed amazingly good Sensors & their Camera bodies are trending smaller, but usability, Lens line up etc is poor in comparison to Nikon/canon.

 

[zim]

The 5D line has always been an event photographers camera and thats who buys them. The files as they are are a good size, making the MP 30+will increase the files by a 1/3 and after editing a raw and saving it as a PSD they are already in the 250mb range which is more than enough. You can only fit 1000 images on a 32gb card so at a typical wedding your shooting 64gbs as it is shooting redundancy is 128gb. It basically means more money to be spent on storage reducing profit margins. When your not printing past A2 or even A1 that space is wasted. Granted it gives you room to crop, but most event shooters don't shoot to crop just adds time in post.

its not a landscape camera and most event shooters don't need that kind of resolution.

The high MP camera designation was always the 1DS and I hope that continues or I for one as an event photographer will be disappointed as Canon won't make a camera for lets be honest the main area photography is still commercial. Landscape photography is a niche, there are not many photographers making a living from it anymore.

I would be happy with a modest boost to 24 or even staying the same with an improvement in noise performance and adding a few other features like GPS and possibly making the camera a little lighter.

+10000 and that's what my money (literally) is on

 

[tomscott]

The 5DMKIII price announcement was a shocker and tainted the camera for a long time. People really were angry especially with the D800 announcement being cheaper and a more advanced sensor. Although I still think the 5DMKIII is a better camera.

Didn't stop me from being excited but I certainly waited a year for the price to drop. A lot of early adopters were pretty annoyed that the price dropped a lot in the first 12 months.

Another few - the 70-200mm MKII and the 24-70mm MKII, I waited 3 years for the 70-200mm to come to a decent price. Although the 24-70 is now reduced I still don't think its quite worth the money especially when the competition and the previous gen is 50% cheaper.

Don't get me wrong they are probably the best zoom lenses available, but the price hike was a lot!

Signs of a turn around? 16-35mm F4 IS being pretty reasonably priced. Price reductions in the US which seem to have been completely ignored in Europe. Meaning the UK £ and US $ prices are the same yet the pound is 60p to the dollar so were still paying 1/3 more for the same gear meaning UK retailers going bust because of huge savings on imports with the likes of Digitalrev and Slrhut and still giving 1 year warranties.

Hopefully Canon has turned slightly with its price strategy.

 

[davidcl0nel]

Meaning the UK £ and US $ prices are the same yet the pound is 60p to the dollar so were still paying 1/3 more for the same gear

As always: The price in US is without sales tax, in Europe with, so please add the 18% (UK) or more tax to the price, if you want a fair comparison... Yes, it's more expensive, but not 1/3 more...

 

[tron]

The 5D line has always been an event photographers camera and thats who buys them. The files as they are are a good size, making the MP 30+will increase the files by a 1/3 and after editing a raw and saving it as a PSD they are already in the 250mb range which is more than enough. You can only fit 1000 images on a 32gb card so at a typical wedding your shooting 64gbs as it is shooting redundancy is 128gb. It basically means more money to be spent on storage reducing profit margins. When your not printing past A2 or even A1 that space is wasted. Granted it gives you room to crop, but most event shooters don't shoot to crop just adds time in post.

its not a landscape camera and most event shooters don't need that kind of resolution.

The high MP camera designation was always the 1DS and I hope that continues or I for one as an event photographer will be disappointed as Canon won't make a camera for lets be honest the main area photography is still commercial. Landscape photography is a niche, there are not many photographers making a living from it anymore.

I would be happy with a modest boost to 24 or even staying the same with an improvement in noise performance and adding a few other features like GPS and possibly making the camera a little lighter.

+10000 and that's what my money (literally) is on

I agree and I would love seeing a new 5DMkIV with same Mpixels, increased DR, lower noise, even higher ISO capabilities and 1 or2 fps more and the new AF of 7DII. Plus some basic firmware related tweeks like Auto ISO in manual mode just like 1Dx's. As I have 2 5DMkIIIs and no other camera I use them for everything.

OK: 1. I am an amateur and 2. I do not need to shoot sports.

But: 5DMkIII does well for landscapes (yes, landscapes), portraits, events and astrophotography.

 

[telemaq76]

i ll buy if the high iso quality is same or better than 5d3 AND the low iso quality of the 1ds3. I ll be happy with that. Low iso of 5d3 is that bad compared to a 1ds3 or a d800

 

[Skirball]

Either go all the way and give wildlife photographers something they can crop (1DX2), or keep it cheaper with a 6D2. Buildings and landscape don't need 65 point AF.